Insurance is about risk management. Forcing a risk manager to ignore risk is about as dumb a suggestion as I've ever heard.
The problem lies elsewhere; the problem lies in the lack of a free market; the problem lies in crony capitalism: Big Business and Big Government using each other to fleece people through coercion.
Fsck "our nation's" space agency; there's nothing "our" about it—the government just took my money and wasted it on a commercial.
I don't trust bureaucrats to allocate my capital properly, and this ridiculous propaganda campaign is proof of the validity of this distrust. The fundamental principle of Capitalism is that capital is best allocated by those who accumulated said capital in the first place; the bureaucrat has no idea what he's doing.
I made the argument that it would no doubt be much more efficient to develop "space" technology from everyday advancements.
You made the argument that everyday advancements have historically proceeded from the incredibly expensive cutting-edge wacko development work undertaken for reasons completely outside the purview of everyday economics.
I disagree, but regardless of whether you are correct, you are not arguing about the same thing.
It would no doubt be much more efficient to develop "space" technology from everyday advancements, rather than to develop everyday advancements from "space" technology. This is because everyday advancements fund themselves.
Among rational people, it would be difficult to procure funding for planting an American flag on the Moon, but it would be easy to procure funding for GPS, satellite communications, asteroid mining, transportation, weather and geographical mapping, etc. These are all things that could lead to planting a flag on the Moon when it becomes inexpensive to do so through some private enterprise that already exists due to having served some directly useful purpose in people's lives.
People should start referring to these people properly.
Quit framing this as Democrat vs. Republican issue; this is an issue of Tyranny vs. Liberty, and Tyranny will rear its ugly head in any party that it can!
So, it's not a physical device? What is a 'physical' device? What is a 'non-physical' device? In fact, what is a 'device'? Sloppy language betrays sloppy thinking.
You'll give me examples, but you'll probably be wrong.
Government, especially as you envision it—a centralized power structure—is ONE solution of many possible solutions; it is merely a local extremum in the field of solutions.
To a civilization as young and naive as we, a centralized power structure just appears to be the inevitable solution (in the same way that, say, monarchies and dictatorships once seemed inevitable) simply because it is all we have ever known and it is self-reinforcing—by its very nature, a centralized power structure tends to inhibit evolution of the solution by quashing variation and stifling selective forces in order to maintain its own hegemony; we are stuck on this small foothill in the field of solutions.
By your ignorance and fear, you are blinded into believing that existing solutions are superior, when what history has actually shown us is that existing solutions and understandings are, in retrospect, almost always risible if not appalling.
Confiscating resources by threat of violence is an ancient and despicable principle; it has no place in a modern, enlightened civilization, and yet you would place it as the foundation stone of social organization. It's risible—nay, it's appalling!
I'm not sure what you're trying to prove with Hostess.
BP and Halliburton use Government to their benefit; thus, they use the threat of violence to take resources from people by force, and so BP and Halliburton are governmental organizations. Any organization—any organization at all—that confiscates resources by threat of violence is a governmental organizations; we just happen to give the one organization that becomes the monopoly (or a significant hub of power) the name "Government". You are railing against Government.
It is not Big Businesses' greed that "corrupts" Government, but rather Big Government's monopoly on violence that corrupts businesses. Big Bad Business cannot exist without Big (Good or Bad) Government.
Again, it's easy to make promises when you are playing with other people's money; a would-be pensioner should have taken that money when he had the chance, eh?
I do not use the fire dept. I gladly pay for it because I MAY need them.
They are providing you the service of peace of mind, so you are indeed using them. Also, your willingness to pay for that peace of mind means that you'd be willing to pay for the same service from a "private" organization (i.e., one that doesn't take your resources by threat of violence). There are probably a million better ways to organize fire-extinguishing services, but the Government inhibits the evolutionary process that would find some of those solutions, because the Government—by the very nature of centralized power—quashes variation and inhibits selection.
This is why we continually elect morons who make things worse
This is why successful endeavors are not run by organizations whose members are voted into office by the general public. If morons run a "private" organization, then it ceases to exist in that incarnation; its resources are transferred into more competent hands—a "private" organization cannot use violence to temporarily pretend that the laws of reality don't exist.
Yes, this means the voters get proper representation... that represents them, the moronic public.
Proper representation is the ability to stop paying for a poorly organized fire department right now, not in 2-to-6 years or so when the powers-that-be deign to allow an individual to fill in a little bubble for 1 of 2 pre-selected "morons" (as you put it). If I don't want to eat mushrooms, I just stop buying them; I don't [yet] have to convince thousands of morons to vote for one moron to vote for a piece of paper that says I don't have to eat mushrooms.
Just leave me alone; get your gun out of my face. I'll represent myself.
As you later hint, a high temperature does not imply a great deal of heat. Also, a hardware fail-safe (i.e., a fuse) is the obvious solution to any such maliciousness.
'in all fairness, this was promised to these people,'
It's easy to promise money, especially when it's not your own money.
That is the nature of Government; it confiscates resources under threat of violence and then squanders them. Government is a bad company that won't go out of business because it can force you to pay for goods and services even if you don't want them or even if you know they won't be fulfilled.
Last night during dinner, a thief walked into my home and asked me whether or not he should put a moratorium on robbing me for the next 2 years.
Just go away. Just leave us alone—now and forever!
Re:To bad that non college education does not resp
on
MOOC Mania
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
apprenticeship / Union Hall system for IT skills.
The capital requirements for computing are about as close to zero as anything can get; if you have a computer and an Internet connection and working brain, then what more do you need?
If you're not motivated enough to cultivate your own personal projects, then join some open source projects, thereby learning how to communicate your ideas effectively in text (through email), work with multiple people in a distributed environment, maintain cross-platform support, etc.
Then, in an interview: "We use <insert open source project> as the core of our system. Do you know anything about it?" "Yeah. I wrote a lot of it." That opens the door much wider than any snooty beaver ring.
I could get by on 50 miles range, if the damn thing didn't take 6 hours to recharge.
This comment of yours is entirely irrational; if you could get by with a 50 mile range, then there is plenty of time for you to charge your vehicle whilst you are not driving it, namely when you are sleeping.
Charging times are based on battery size and the combined voltage and amperage of the power source. A high-amperage 230 volt outlet can charge Model S from empty to full overnight. Model S is capable of recharging in 45 minutes using a fast charging station.
Competitors (including hobbyist individuals!) would all have the incentive to develop and demonstrate a ubiquitously accessible way for some phenomenon to be produced, thereby rendering the phenomenon non-patentable and available for production by anyone. This would have 2 plausible effects:
0. Sometimes, a simple phenomenon comes out of very long-term, expensive research; clearly, this model of patenting would create a disincentive for that.
1. There would be a revolution in accessible manufacturing (as seen with software development), and thus experimentation (as seen with software development).
I would argue that effect number "0" would be mitigated or even hidden by effect number "1": Those simple ideas that come out of complex research are probably mostly happy accidents anyway, and the distributed nature of accessible manufacturing would create many more opportunities for stumbling upon those discoveries cheaply; this decentralization and localization of the power structure yields a more robust evolutionary process (that is, variation and selection).
Slashdot Mirror
Insurance is about risk management. Forcing a risk manager to ignore risk is about as dumb a suggestion as I've ever heard.
The problem lies elsewhere; the problem lies in the lack of a free market; the problem lies in crony capitalism: Big Business and Big Government using each other to fleece people through coercion.
But he just suggested a law and restriction: Forcing an insurance company to accept risk against its better judgment.
Read about it and understand it.
My, my, my... I thought we were passed all that.
Fsck "our nation's" space agency; there's nothing "our" about it—the government just took my money and wasted it on a commercial.
I don't trust bureaucrats to allocate my capital properly, and this ridiculous propaganda campaign is proof of the validity of this distrust. The fundamental principle of Capitalism is that capital is best allocated by those who accumulated said capital in the first place; the bureaucrat has no idea what he's doing.
I'm mostly interested in the promised features and stability improvements.
Indeed. I tried OpenShot once, and it was a complete waste of my time.
Let's put it this way: If it were anything but crap, they wouldn't need a Kickstarter project to port it to other operating systems.
I'm tired of people just cobbling things together. Please, start thinking first.
I made the argument that it would no doubt be much more efficient to develop "space" technology from everyday advancements.
You made the argument that everyday advancements have historically proceeded from the incredibly expensive cutting-edge wacko development work undertaken for reasons completely outside the purview of everyday economics.
I disagree, but regardless of whether you are correct, you are not arguing about the same thing.
It would no doubt be much more efficient to develop "space" technology from everyday advancements, rather than to develop everyday advancements from "space" technology. This is because everyday advancements fund themselves.
Among rational people, it would be difficult to procure funding for planting an American flag on the Moon, but it would be easy to procure funding for GPS, satellite communications, asteroid mining, transportation, weather and geographical mapping, etc. These are all things that could lead to planting a flag on the Moon when it becomes inexpensive to do so through some private enterprise that already exists due to having served some directly useful purpose in people's lives.
Read about it and understand it.
People should start referring to these people properly.
Quit framing this as Democrat vs. Republican issue; this is an issue of Tyranny vs. Liberty, and Tyranny will rear its ugly head in any party that it can!
Not while you impose that one-sided, open-ended contract you portray as a 'copyright assignment'...
In fact we Physicist often anthropomorphize when talking amongst ourselves
Yes. It's a great shame.
Systems with an upper bound in energy don’t want to be in that highest energy state.
Sigh...
Rather than an actual physical device
So, it's not a physical device? What is a 'physical' device? What is a 'non-physical' device? In fact, what is a 'device'? Sloppy language betrays sloppy thinking.
You'll give me examples, but you'll probably be wrong.
Government, especially as you envision it—a centralized power structure—is ONE solution of many possible solutions; it is merely a local extremum in the field of solutions.
To a civilization as young and naive as we, a centralized power structure just appears to be the inevitable solution (in the same way that, say, monarchies and dictatorships once seemed inevitable) simply because it is all we have ever known and it is self-reinforcing—by its very nature, a centralized power structure tends to inhibit evolution of the solution by quashing variation and stifling selective forces in order to maintain its own hegemony; we are stuck on this small foothill in the field of solutions.
By your ignorance and fear, you are blinded into believing that existing solutions are superior, when what history has actually shown us is that existing solutions and understandings are, in retrospect, almost always risible if not appalling.
Confiscating resources by threat of violence is an ancient and despicable principle; it has no place in a modern, enlightened civilization, and yet you would place it as the foundation stone of social organization. It's risible—nay, it's appalling!
I'm not sure what you're trying to prove with Hostess.
BP and Halliburton use Government to their benefit; thus, they use the threat of violence to take resources from people by force, and so BP and Halliburton are governmental organizations. Any organization—any organization at all—that confiscates resources by threat of violence is a governmental organizations; we just happen to give the one organization that becomes the monopoly (or a significant hub of power) the name "Government". You are railing against Government.
It is not Big Businesses' greed that "corrupts" Government, but rather Big Government's monopoly on violence that corrupts businesses. Big Bad Business cannot exist without Big (Good or Bad) Government.
Big Brother is a great deal more subtle, which is why he has you fooled.
Your fears suggest that people will organize solutions. However, your solutions shouldn't involve putting a gun in my face or throwing me into a cage.
No, that really seems unlikely.
--- said the actual idiot.
Benefits come out from the salary
Again, it's easy to make promises when you are playing with other people's money; a would-be pensioner should have taken that money when he had the chance, eh?
I do not use the fire dept. I gladly pay for it because I MAY need them.
They are providing you the service of peace of mind, so you are indeed using them. Also, your willingness to pay for that peace of mind means that you'd be willing to pay for the same service from a "private" organization (i.e., one that doesn't take your resources by threat of violence). There are probably a million better ways to organize fire-extinguishing services, but the Government inhibits the evolutionary process that would find some of those solutions, because the Government—by the very nature of centralized power—quashes variation and inhibits selection.
This is why we continually elect morons who make things worse
This is why successful endeavors are not run by organizations whose members are voted into office by the general public. If morons run a "private" organization, then it ceases to exist in that incarnation; its resources are transferred into more competent hands—a "private" organization cannot use violence to temporarily pretend that the laws of reality don't exist.
Yes, this means the voters get proper representation... that represents them, the moronic public.
Proper representation is the ability to stop paying for a poorly organized fire department right now, not in 2-to-6 years or so when the powers-that-be deign to allow an individual to fill in a little bubble for 1 of 2 pre-selected "morons" (as you put it). If I don't want to eat mushrooms, I just stop buying them; I don't [yet] have to convince thousands of morons to vote for one moron to vote for a piece of paper that says I don't have to eat mushrooms.
Just leave me alone; get your gun out of my face. I'll represent myself.
As you later hint, a high temperature does not imply a great deal of heat. Also, a hardware fail-safe (i.e., a fuse) is the obvious solution to any such maliciousness.
'in all fairness, this was promised to these people,'
It's easy to promise money, especially when it's not your own money.
That is the nature of Government; it confiscates resources under threat of violence and then squanders them. Government is a bad company that won't go out of business because it can force you to pay for goods and services even if you don't want them or even if you know they won't be fulfilled.
Last night during dinner, a thief walked into my home and asked me whether or not he should put a moratorium on robbing me for the next 2 years.
Just go away. Just leave us alone—now and forever!
apprenticeship / Union Hall system for IT skills.
The capital requirements for computing are about as close to zero as anything can get; if you have a computer and an Internet connection and working brain, then what more do you need?
If you're not motivated enough to cultivate your own personal projects, then join some open source projects, thereby learning how to communicate your ideas effectively in text (through email), work with multiple people in a distributed environment, maintain cross-platform support, etc.
Then, in an interview:
"We use <insert open source project> as the core of our system. Do you know anything about it?"
"Yeah. I wrote a lot of it."
That opens the door much wider than any snooty beaver ring.
I could get by on 50 miles range, if the damn thing didn't take 6 hours to recharge.
This comment of yours is entirely irrational; if you could get by with a 50 mile range, then there is plenty of time for you to charge your vehicle whilst you are not driving it, namely when you are sleeping.
Furthermore, according to Tesla's FAQ:
Competitors (including hobbyist individuals!) would all have the incentive to develop and demonstrate a ubiquitously accessible way for some phenomenon to be produced, thereby rendering the phenomenon non-patentable and available for production by anyone. This would have 2 plausible effects:
0. Sometimes, a simple phenomenon comes out of very long-term, expensive research; clearly, this model of patenting would create a disincentive for that.
1. There would be a revolution in accessible manufacturing (as seen with software development), and thus experimentation (as seen with software development).
I would argue that effect number "0" would be mitigated or even hidden by effect number "1": Those simple ideas that come out of complex research are probably mostly happy accidents anyway, and the distributed nature of accessible manufacturing would create many more opportunities for stumbling upon those discoveries cheaply; this decentralization and localization of the power structure yields a more robust evolutionary process (that is, variation and selection).